|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Why I hate bicycle advocacy groups
From http://www.bicyclelaw.com/blog/
"In the past few weeks, the subject of taxes—specifically, taxes on bicycles—has come up once again. On November 12, Bikeportland reported that the Bicycle Transportation Alliance (a bicycle advocacy organization based in Portland, Oregon) and Metro (the regional government for the Portland metropolitan area) both support a recommendation by Oregon Governor Ted Kulongoski’s Transportation Vision Committee to create a “point-of-sale excise tax on the purchase of adult bicycles.” The proposed excise tax—a fee in the range of $5-$20 per bike—“should be used to enhance bicycle transportation, including Safe Routes to Schools.”" "Karl Rohde, the Government Affairs and Public Relations Director for the Bicycle Transportation Alliance (commonly known by its acronym, BTA), explained that there are two reasons for the BTA’s support for the tax. First, Bikeportland reports, Rohde feels that it will be an important political tool to counter arguments that bikes don’t pay their share to maintain and build roads. Second, the BTA believes that the revenue generated by a bike excise tax would provide a more reliable funding stream for bike programs than the gas tax. Interestingly, although supportive of the bike excise tax, Metro apparently contradicts that second argument, arguing that the purpose of the tax is to “address concern, however mistaken, that cyclists don’t carry their weight. This may be an important equity effort, rather than a key funding source.”" With friends like this, who needs enemies? |
Ads |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Why I hate bicycle advocacy groups
On Jan 12, 7:03*pm, Peter Cole wrote:
*Fromhttp://www.bicyclelaw.com/blog/ "In the past few weeks, the subject of taxes—specifically, taxes on bicycles—has come up once again. On November 12, Bikeportland reported that the Bicycle Transportation Alliance (a bicycle advocacy organization based in Portland, Oregon) and Metro (the regional government for the Portland metropolitan area) both support a recommendation by Oregon Governor Ted Kulongoski’s Transportation Vision Committee to create a “point-of-sale excise tax on the purchase of adult bicycles.” The proposed excise tax—a fee in the range of $5-$20 per bike—“should be used to enhance bicycle transportation, including Safe Routes to Schools.”" "Karl Rohde, the Government Affairs and Public Relations Director for the Bicycle Transportation Alliance (commonly known by its acronym, BTA), explained that there are two reasons for the BTA’s support for the tax. First, Bikeportland reports, Rohde feels that it will be an important political tool to counter arguments that bikes don’t pay their share to maintain and build roads. Second, the BTA believes that the revenue generated by a bike excise tax would provide a more reliable funding stream for bike programs than the gas tax. Interestingly, although supportive of the bike excise tax, Metro apparently contradicts that second argument, arguing that the purpose of the tax is to “address concern, however mistaken, that cyclists don’t carry their weight. This may be an important equity effort, rather than a key funding source.”" With friends like this, who needs enemies? Those are the same folks who applaud striping of bike lanes in door zones, and striping of bike lanes right up to the intersection. The former resulted in prosecution of at least one cyclist who left the lane for his own safety. The latter resulted in some well-publicized cyclist fatalities, when the riders were run over by right turning vehicles. So to cure the latter, the "advocates" pushed for green "bike boxes" so the cyclists can ride up on the right, then swerve out in front of the first car or truck stopped at a red light, to sit in the center of the lane. But what happens if the light turns green as the cyclist passes on the right or swerves left? Why not just have the cyclist in the center of the lane whenever traffic stops? BTA are prime examples of people who think ANY bike facility is a good bike facility. With fools like this, who needs enemies? - Frank Krygowski |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Why I hate bicycle advocacy groups
On Jan 12, 7:06*pm, Frank Krygowski wrote:
So to cure the latter, the "advocates" pushed for green "bike boxes" so the cyclists can ride up on the right, then swerve out in front of the first car or truck stopped at a red light, to sit in the center of the lane. But what happens if the light turns green as the cyclist passes on the right or swerves left? The car or truck immediately accelerates into the green area, running over the cyclist. I've seen it countless times, and it's why I always wear a helmet. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Why I hate bicycle advocacy groups
Around here we fund the state's Children's Health Insurance Program
(CHIP) partly or wholly with funds generated by the cigarette tax. I think that funding bike-related projects partly or wholly from the gas tax follows some pretty sound precedent. I hope some cyclist(s) in your area will give some calm, reasoned, clearly documented testimony about that bill if and when it comes up. Bill (thinking of going by Frumious in this group) | No one is exempt from the call to find common ground. __o | -- Barak Obama `\(, | A dictatorship would be a lot easier. (_)/ (_) | --George W. Bush Peter Cole wrote: From http://www.bicyclelaw.com/blog/ "In the past few weeks, the subject of taxes???specifically, taxes on bicycles???has come up once again. On November 12, Bikeportland reported that the Bicycle Transportation Alliance (a bicycle advocacy organization based in Portland, Oregon) and Metro (the regional government for the Portland metropolitan area) both support a recommendation by Oregon Governor Ted Kulongoski???s Transportation Vision Committee to create a ???point-of-sale excise tax on the purchase of adult bicycles.??? The proposed excise tax???a fee in the range of $5-$20 per bike??????should be used to enhance bicycle transportation, including Safe Routes to Schools.???" "Karl Rohde, the Government Affairs and Public Relations Director for the Bicycle Transportation Alliance (commonly known by its acronym, BTA), explained that there are two reasons for the BTA???s support for the tax. First, Bikeportland reports, Rohde feels that it will be an important political tool to counter arguments that bikes don???t pay their share to maintain and build roads. Second, the BTA believes that the revenue generated by a bike excise tax would provide a more reliable funding stream for bike programs than the gas tax. Interestingly, although supportive of the bike excise tax, Metro apparently contradicts that second argument, arguing that the purpose of the tax is to ???address concern, however mistaken, that cyclists don???t carry their weight. This may be an important equity effort, rather than a key funding source.???" With friends like this, who needs enemies? |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Why I hate bicycle advocacy groups
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Why I hate bicycle advocacy groups
Bill Sornson wrote:
wrote: Around here we fund the state's Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP) partly or wholly with funds generated by the cigarette tax. So 25-year-olds and kids in families making up to $85,000.00 per year get free medical care! God bless those coffin-nail addicts! Actually, I think it's targeted mainly at low-income and otherwise un- or under-insured. No 25-year-olds, no upper income families. Your statement is inaccurate. Bill __o | What is objectionable, and what is dangerous about extremists _`\(,_ | is not that they are extreme, but that they are intolerant. (_)/ (_) | --Robert F. Kennedy |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Why I hate bicycle advocacy groups
On Jan 13, 10:41*am, "Bill Sornson" wrote:
wrote: * Around here we fund the state's Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP) partly or wholly with funds generated by the cigarette tax. So 25-year-olds and kids in families making up to $85,000.00 per year get free medical care! * It's amazing how Right Wing Nut Jobs think they can simply LIE with the internet and all. That's why RWNJs like Bill are completely dismissable as fruitcake kooks. CHIP is available to higher incomes with a monthly premium. Why RWNJs would be against something that makes total economic sense is lost on me--other than what appears to be an addiction to outrage and authoritarianism--the "lie fuel". When you get more folks on a plan, even those that are paying a full premium, the better it works. Duh! Not the first time you've been caught straight up lying Bill. What a dope. Here's my documentation: http://www.chipcoverspakids.com/asse..._CHART_web.pdf Where's yours, liar? That's right, you got nuttin'. You'd be a barrel of laughs--if there weren't so many lying dopes like you clogging the internet tubes. Repetition does not create reality. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Why I hate bicycle advocacy groups
On Jan 13, 3:06*pm, "Bill Sornson" wrote:
wrote: Bill Sornson wrote: wrote: * Around here we fund the state's Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP) partly or wholly with funds generated by the cigarette tax. So 25-year-olds and kids in families making up to $85,000.00 per year get free medical care! *God bless those coffin-nail addicts! * Actually, I think it's targeted mainly at low-income and otherwise un- or under-insured. *No 25-year-olds, no upper income families. Your statement is inaccurate. Two-second, carbon-eating Google (MANY hits): http://www.heritage.org/research/healthcare/wm1546.cfm Heritage.org? The antiAmerican front for the US's anti-democracy dominionist mullahs? Hahahahahahahaha!!! I see you haven't addressed the lie you told about free health care for kids whose parents make $85K. Got any more lies or links to organisations that are a threat to democracy? *fingermustache* |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Why I hate bicycle advocacy groups
In article ,
Peter Cole writes in part: From http://www.bicyclelaw.com/blog/ [snip] "Karl Rohde, the Government Affairs and Public Relations Director for the Bicycle Transportation Alliance (commonly known by its acronym, BTA), explained that there are two reasons for the BTA’s support for the tax. First, Bikeportland reports, Rohde feels that it will be an important political tool to counter arguments that bikes don’t pay their share to maintain and build roads. Second, the BTA believes that the revenue generated by a bike excise tax would provide a more reliable funding stream for bike programs than the gas tax." [snip] With friends like this, who needs enemies? Public mobility, whether by driving, riding, walking or public transit, is beneficial to The Economy. Citizens are downright /owed/ mobility-conducive streets 'n roads (and sidewalks,) in order to both get to work to earn money, and to access the businesses we patronize to spend the money we earn. Maybe *businesses* should pay their fair share to maintain and build roads, since they are the main beneficiaries. Maybe they already do, but it's all too easy for gov'ts to evoke misbegotten perceptions (e.g: that bicyclists are non-contributing joyriders) in order to rationalize their tax grabs. Maybe local govt's should spend more on improving transportation, and less on "fact-finding junkets" to Barbados or The Azores. cheers, Tom -- Nothing is safe from me. I'm really at: tkeats curlicue vcn dot bc dot ca |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
McSame-Palin defend hate groups & racism | RB[_3_] | Racing | 0 | October 17th 08 03:28 PM |
McSame-Palin defend hate groups & racism | [email protected] | Racing | 1 | October 15th 08 12:26 PM |
McSame-Palin defend hate groups & racism | John H | Racing | 1 | October 14th 08 03:39 AM |
McSame-Palin defend hate groups & racism | perreigh | Racing | 1 | October 13th 08 10:47 PM |
bicycle advocacy | ubersquish | Unicycling | 10 | November 17th 03 10:37 AM |